I am sorry to hear about your illness. Best wishes for a full recovery!

I have voted "no" in the poll, but I have done so without having touched the K-1 at all (I am starting to feel a strong influence from Ken Rockwell in my forum activities...). Anyway, I am very happy with my Pentax K-5iis, and I very much appreciate the small size of my DSLR kit. For instance, the K-5iis fitted with the DA15/4, constitutes a very powerful photographic tool within a compact package. There are also many DA and K, M and A series primes that are very small, that can be part of a compact K-5iis kit. I am sure that the K-1 is a superior camera to the K-5iis in most aspects, with compactness is also part of camera performance in a way. Another thing to consider is lenses. The DA 15/4 is a wonderful lens, and right now there is no corresponding Pentax D-FA full frame wide angle prime for the Pentax K-1. The D-FA 15-30/2.8 is a very expensive and heavy beast, and quite different from the DA15/4. As a conclusion, my "no" is based on size and lens selection.

Sorry to hear about the sad fate of your MX-1, you have produced some wonderful images with it. I could echo the sentiments above about bringing a DSLR and some lenses, but I can understand the attraction of a compact device like the MX-1. No doubt you can find good performers also amongst Sony, Fuji and other brands of mirrorless compact cameras.

By the way, nice image with good colours.

I have done this once in the past, with a "good enough" result. My procedure was to set up the 8mm film projector with a piece of good quality white plain paper about 50 cm from the lens, so the projected film was shown on a very small frame. I placed my Canon Mini-DV camcorder next to the film projector, and recorded/dubbed the film.

Film flicker is the main problem with digitalising film with a DIY set-up. If I were to do this again, I would have tried to find a Eumig projector (or similar high quality projector) with a speed control, because it is possible to fine adjust the film speed so that flicker is greatly reduced.

My family have some very valuable 8mm films from my childhood in Tanzania in the 1960s, and one day I would like to have these digitised by a professional lab. The results from having the films scanned frame by frame using the best 8mm > digital machines is expensive, but will probably produce superior results.

Superb work! I am glad your fantastic photos receive that kind of attention.

The K-1 looks to be a very competent camera, with class leading resolution, low price and features that makes it rather unique. I find it interesting to read about user experience and also reviews of the new camera. Maybe the most interesting thing now for me is how well vintage Pentax lenses fare on the K-1.

I still enjoy shooting film, and have the medium format Pentax 67ii for those occasions when resolution and image quality is of most concern (and when I can drive to a location with my car...). Other times I enjoy using my KX 35mm film camera for those "full frame" shots (without astrotracer, pixel-shift etc., but still lots of basic fun).

When I feel like shooting with a digital camera, I use the K-5 or K-5iis (sometimes also the K20D). I simply love the small size of the K-5 fitted with the DA15/4. Quite often I prefer to just use the K-5 with two lenses: DA15/4 + K30/2.8.

The small K-5 kit also complements the large Pentax 67ii, so it makes sense to bring both of these systems if I am planning on going for a longer or more ambitious photographic venture.

The conclusion for me, is that for the time being I have more than enough camera equipment for my needs, and I will not pursue a purchase of the K-1 fullframe in the immediate future. If (when) Fuji stop making slide film, I know I have to reconsider my affair with film. But untill then, I am fine with the equipment I already have. ( Having said this, the K-1 looks like a damn fine camera, maybe I should just sell my 67ii system and ...:shock

An impressive set, I especially appreciate numbers 2, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 11. Thank you for sharing!

I have a Pentax 67ii medium format film camera, and some lenses. The last lens I acquired for the system was the SMC Pentax 67 300/4, this is the last incarnation of this lens. I have tried the lens briefly on my Pentax K20D with the original Pentax 67-K adapter. The resulting images were quite promising, and not unlike the images I can expect from my FA* 300/4.5 lens. The FA* tele is very good, probably as good as the modern DA 300mm (?), and the fact that the old 67 300/4 performed this well on an aps-c DSLR amazed me.

The main drawback with this lens is that the minimum focussing distance is maybe 5 meters, I cannot remember the exact numbers. Anyway, the tele is not very useful for photographing objects close to you. The other main drawback is its weight, it is very heavy. The last negative thing with this lens is the lack of a tripod collar.

I intend to use the lens on my 67ii camera, and on this camera there is an issue of mirror induced vibration with slowish shutter speeds. The 300/4 does not balance well on the camera on a tripod due to its weight, and without a tripod collar the lens functions best hand held.

Here is a shot from the 67ii + SMC 300/4 shot on Kodak Porta 400 colour negative film. Camera hand held, lens at f16.

This is a superb little lens, characterized by great colour rendition and sharpness. It is also quite hard to find these days. I have heard some people say that the FA 31/1.8 Limited is the rich mans alternative to the SMC K30/2.8.

Somebody should snap this up!

I stand corrected I share your thoughs about weight, the K-1 is not heavy compared to other fullgrame cameras or indeed the mighty Pentax 67.

I had forgotten about the 17-28mm fisheye, that is also an interesting option.

There is a Norwegian Pentax ambassadeur that currently is using a pre production K-1 (maybe it is only the software that is not fully developed?). Anyway, he recently posted a comment on the American forum that the DA 12-24/4 + 1.4 converter works flawlessly through the whole zoomrange on the K-1, without significant vignetting. If this is true, this combination could be a useful 17-34mm fullframe zoom for daylight shooting Exciting times ahead.